Evidence map›Paper›PMID 9224593›Full record

ArticleNucleic acids research1997

Representation of cloned genomic sequences in two sequencing vectors: correlation of DNA sequence and subclone distribution.

S L Chissoe, M A Marra, L Hillier, R Brinkman, R K Wilson, R H Waterston

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nucleic acids research, 1997. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

S L ChissoeDepartment of Genetics and Genome Sequencing Center, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO 63108, USA. schissoe@watson.wustl.edu
M A Marra
L Hillier
R Brinkman
R K Wilson
R H Waterston

Funding

NHGRI NIH HHS HG00958
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Representation of subcloned Caenorhabditis elegans and human DNA sequences in both M13 and pUC sequencing vectors was determined in the context of large scale genomic sequencing. In many cases, regions of subclone under-representation correlated with the occurrence of repeat sequences, and in some cases the under-representation was orientation specific. Factors which affected subclone representation included the nature and complexity of the repeat sequence, as well as the length of the repeat region. In some but not all cases, notable differences between the M13 and pUC subclone distributions existed. However, in all regions lacking one type of subclone (either M13 or pUC), an alternate subclone was identified in at least one orientation. This suggests that complementary use of M13 and pUC subclones would provide the most comprehensive subclone coverage of a given genomic sequence.

Indexed as

Cloning, MolecularGenetic VectorsAnimalsBase SequenceBinding SitesCaenorhabditis elegansCosmidsGenomeHumans

Identifiers

PMID9224593
PMCPMC146865

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.